• Research
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie India logoCarnegie lettermark logo
AI
{
  "authors": [
    "Evan A. Feigenbaum"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "AP",
  "programs": [
    "Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "East Asia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Why America No Longer Gets Asia

The United States is failing to adapt to the drama of economic and institutional change in Asia. America risks missing opportunities in every part of the region—East, Central, and South—while being out-competed in both geopolitics and business.

Link Copied
By Evan A. Feigenbaum
Published on Jan 4, 2016

Source: Parlio

Asia is changing dramatically but the United States is losing the plot. The region is being stitched back together in ways that could make the United States less relevant in each of Asia’s constituent parts. Asians are, in various ways, passing America by.

Recent articles in the Financial Times, New York Times, and other major media have delved into China’s grand new plan to reconnect Asia with a network of massive infrastructure projects. This so-called “One Belt, One Road” effort, launched to great fanfare by President Xi Jinping in 2013, evokes the ancient Silk Road that stretched from Asia to Europe and saw goods, people, and technology move across continental caravan routes and well-trafficked sea lanes. The "Belt and Road" is Xi’s signature foreign policy initiative and may soon include billions in new Chinese spending. On paper, at least, it is a classic example of economic statecraft, envisioning a series of China-sponsored rails, roads, pipelines, ports, and power stations spanning Asia, from Indonesia to Turkmenistan and beyond.

Some argue that this Chinese initiative aims to construct a Sinocentric Asia and dislodge the United States. But in fact, the competitive challenge America now faces in Asia is bigger, broader, and has deeper roots.

Put bluntly, Asia is being reconnected, strategically and economically. Ultimately, the region could, in important ways, more closely resemble the historical norm that prevailed for centuries prior to America’s arrival.

This change reflects trends that date back decades and is a function of the choices, actions, and capabilities of many Asian states — not just China but also Japan, India, and South Korea, among others.

Asians are, in various ways, passing America by.

The United States is badly prepared for this momentous rebirth, which is at once stitching Asia back together and making the United States less relevant in each of Asia’s constituent parts.

The question is not just whether or to what extent the United States is or isn't “pivoting” to Asia, as U.S. officials have put it. More broadly, the question is whether the United States, to compete in both geopolitics and business, appreciates the dramatic ways in which Asia is changing.

In this essay in The Washington Quarterly, written two years before Xi proposed the "Belt and Road" but, I fear, still all too relevant, I explored “Why America No Longer Gets Asia” and how the United States can adapt to these new challenges.

A follow up essay in Foreign Affairs several months ago pulled these threads some more in light of the U.S.-backed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the China-backed Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

This article was originally published on Parlio.

About the Author

Evan A. Feigenbaum

Vice President for Studies

Evan A. Feigenbaum is vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where he oversees work at its offices in Washington, New Delhi, and Singapore on a dynamic region encompassing both East Asia and South Asia. He served twice as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State and advised two Secretaries of State and a former Treasury Secretary on Asia.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    In Its Iran War Debate, Washington Has Lost the Plot in Asia

      Evan A. Feigenbaum

  • Commentary
    Beijing Doesn’t Think Like Washington—and the Iran Conflict Shows Why

      Evan A. Feigenbaum

Evan A. Feigenbaum
Vice President for Studies
Evan A. Feigenbaum
Foreign PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesEast Asia

Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie India

  • Article
    Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026

    This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.

      Vrinda Sahai

  • Article
    India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible Pathways

    A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.

      Rajiv Bhatia

  • Commentary
    The Unresolved Challenges in U.S.–India Semiconductor Cooperation

    The U.S.–India semiconductor cooperation story is well-stocked with top-level strategic intent. What remains unresolved, however, are some underlying challenges that will determine whether the cooperation actually functions. Three such friction points stand out.

      Shruti Mittal

  • Commentary
    Emerging From the “Zombie State” of Trade Agreements: The India-EU FTA

    The India–EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA) is shaping up to be one of the most consequential trade negotiations, both economically and strategically. But, what’s in the agreement, what’s missing, and what will determine its success in the years ahead

      Vrinda Sahai, Nicolas Köhler-Suzuki

  • India and a Changing Global Order: Foreign Policy in the Trump 2.0 Era
    Research
    India and a Changing Global Order: Foreign Policy in the Trump 2.0 Era

    Trump 2.0 has unsettled India’s external environment—but has not overturned its foreign policy strategy, which continues to rely on diversification, hedging, and calibrated partnerships across a fractured order.

      • Sameer Lalwani
      • +6

      Milan Vaishnav, ed., Sameer Lalwani, Tanvi Madan, …

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
Carnegie India logo, white
Unit C-4, 5, 6, EdenparkShaheed Jeet Singh MargNew Delhi – 110016, IndiaPhone: 011-40078687
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.